October032011

Hackerhub enables you to publish content online, but unlike other
platforms we dont want to know anything about you. There is no
registration at all, just your content, under your control.Hackerhub caches* and distributes content - that's it.

// MozMozilla Labs designed the BrowserID experiment
to increase user convenience and safety online. Using Mozilla’s Privacy
& Data Operating Principles as guidelines, we built a system that
seeks to maximize user privacy and control by shrinking the user-data
minefield, disclosing information to sites only on a need-to-know
basis, employing a model that is intuitive and users understand, and
limiting tracking of browsing behavior while also enabling pseudonymity
online. For more information, be sure to check out our blog post about privacy and BrowserID, as well as the BrowserID homepage. //

September052011

“[...]

I know users of CyanogenMod in Iran who are directly impacted by this compromise of DigiNotar. Additionally, they use the GSM network and it is possible to set the clocks of GSM phones - so certificates that have been issued are not valid only during some window of time - the attackers literally control time. The attackers here have all of the cards and only by removing the trust in DigiNotar *at the root* will help those users to stay secure

August292011

“

[...]

(L)egal identity needs to be administrated in the
online domain (which, contrary to what NSTIC and others seem to think,
is not demonstrably proven), it remains that without the protections outlined in the “dotrights” campaign,
the NSTIC effort is an incredibly dangerous movement for state managed
identity as well as for citizens/consumers and their rights/interests.
But don’t take my word for it, consider carefully the wording and
implications of Mr. Messina:

“The last thing that I’ll add — which itself is
controversial — is that this whole system, at least at the outset, will
be voluntary and opt-in,” Messina says. “That means that if you don’t
want the convenience of not having to use passwords anymore, you won’t
have to. If you’re okay rotating your passwords and maintaining
numerous discreet accounts across the web, that’s cool too. I don’t
think a mandatory system would succeed — at least not without proving
its security, stability, convenience, and utility over several years.”

I would point out that the current efforts by Google are, in fact, “entirely voluntary and opt-in”.

I would also point out that they have made it exceedingly clear that
they are being driven by a yet-unexplained motivation that makes taking
a “don’t like it, leave” stance attractive for Google.

I would further point out that Google’s CEO Schmidt himself stated
that (paraphrasing), “Google+ is an identity service”; this is also
supported by Google’s own site.

My assertions and conclusions at this point are, I think, things that you will find utterly logical:

Google intends to be one (the first? the premiere? the only?) identity service for the USA.

Google intends that their existing hold over users (adoption of
services and products and related entrenchment thereto) be the weight
brought to bear that ensures adoption rather than abandonment.

Google intends that their ability to demonstrate adoption will
allow them to leverage themselves, if not into the position of sole
provider, then into a position of an elite few.

Google intends to lobby and support our government in reaching a
point of transition at which this “entirely voluntary and opt-in”
identity service may become a mandatory one.

Google is counting on YOUR continued use and willingness to adopt and endure any change they make to accomplish this.

Seem far fetched? Why? Messina is obviously thinking about it, the
NSTIC is as well, thus Google, our Government, and who knows who else
are thinking about it, too. Look at this and understand: There
is not that much distance at all between Messina’s statements and the
above assertions and conclusions and, frankly, that distance will close
rapidly if Google is right about consumer apathy and passive adoption.

August222011

Registration at Diaspora* - a decentralized social media platform - is meanwhile unlimited - no real name obligation, like in G+ and Fb !https://joindiaspora.comor have a look to this list of Diaspora* pods to choose whatever pod you want to join as your registration server.

For French speaking users: follow the hash tag #French;for German speaking users: to start, follow for instance #jul14 or #German ;for English speaking users: you may try #English (not useful); it's in general for you much easier; many conversations are by necessity in English -

generally it's easy, once you will be registrated: you will have no problems to build up your contacts and to figure out their specific nationalities and interests (profiles);

August032011

“[...]

The problem with the civility argument is that it doesn’t tell the whole story. Not only is uncivil discourse alive and well in venues with real name policies (such as Facebook), the argument willfully ignores the many voices that are silenced in the name of shutting up trolls: activists living under authoritarian regimes, whistleblowers, victims of violence, abuse, and harassment, and anyone with an unpopular or dissenting point of view that can legitimately expect to be imprisoned, beat-up, or harassed for speaking out.

June092011

June032011

“[...]

Message By Lulzsec:Our goal here is not to come across as master hackers, hence what we're about to reveal: SonyPictures.com was owned by a very simple SQL injection, one of the most primitive and common vulnerabilities, as we should all know by now. From a single injection, we accessed EVERYTHING. Why do you put such faith in a company that allows itself to become open to these simple attacks? What's worse is that every bit of data we took wasn't encrypted. Sony stored over 1,000,000 passwords of its customers in plaintext, which means it's just a matter of taking it. This is disgraceful and insecure: they were asking for it.

As a non-profit organization that tracks Internet censorship across
the globe and spreads knowledge about online filtering, GVA publishes
information to teach others—specifically, online activists in
developing countries that place restrictions on Internet content—how to
circumvent domestic Internet filtering. However, Zuckerman noted
the
circular reasoning of this specific incident:

“In other words, the National Science Foundation is
spending taxpayer money to (ineffectively) prevent scientists from
learning about a debate about ‘internet freedom’ tools the US State
Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors are spending
taxpayer money to support and promote, again using taxpayer
money. Is
there a Federal irony department where I can lodge a complaint?”